Our cosmos, from substance to process
World Futures 64 (2):84 – 93 (2008)
| Abstract | Philosophies of nature over the past three centuries have gone through three distinct phases, beginning with classical views and now evolving into a process view at the dawn of the 21st century. These phases derive from a complex weaving of two frameworks of physics since Newton's time [classical, modern] with two principal metaphysical frameworks[substance, event]. Problematic fin de sicle claims at the end of both the 19th and 20th centuries appear to have a common root in substance metaphysics and part/whole reductionism. Going beyond such simplistic forms of modernism requires a more integrated, ecological worldview, or process view of nature. | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,709 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesRobert Oakes (2012). Strong Interiority and (Traditional) Theism: What's the Problem? Ratio 25 (1):68-78.
Catherine Jack Deavel (2003). Unity and Primary Substance for Aristotle. Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 77:159-172.
Mark H. Bickhard (2009). The Interactivist Model. Synthese 166 (3):547 - 591.
Sajjad H. Rizvi (2005). Mullā Sadrā and Causation: Rethinking a Problem in Later Islamic Philosophy. Philosophy East and West 55 (4):570-583.
Ian J. Thompson (1988). The Nature of Substance. Cogito 2 (2):17-19.
Hartmann Romer (2006). Complementarity of Process and Substance. Mind and Matter 4 (1):69-89.
Joshua Hoffman (1994). Substance Among Other Categories. Cambridge University Press.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads15 ( #78,761 of 549,715 )Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,425 of 549,715 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
